Obama The Dictator

Posted on 16-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

On Friday, 15-JUN-12, President Obama bypassed Congress (and the Constitution) and decreed that 800,000 illegal immigrants can not only stay in the country legally but be given work permits.

“(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON – President Obama eased enforcement of immigration laws Friday, offering a chance for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants to stay in the country and work. Immediately embraced by Hispanics, the extraordinary step touched off an election-year confrontation with congressional Republicans.”

“This is not amnesty; this is not immunity; this is not a path to citizenship; it’s not a permanent fix,” Mr. Obama said. “This is a temporary stopgap measure that lets us focus our resources wisely while giving a degree of relief and hope to talented, driven, patriotic young people. It is the right thing to do.”

“The policy change will affect as many as 800,000 immigrants who have lived in fear of deportation. It bypasses Congress and partially achieves the goals of the “DREAM Act,” congressional legislation that would establish a path toward citizenship for young people who came to the United States illegally but who attend college or join the military.”

“Under the administration plan, illegal immigrants will be immune from deportation if they were brought to the United States before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED or served in the military. They also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed.”

Does the President of the United States have the authority, under the Constitution, to change immigration laws?

Below is an excerpt from Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution (Powers reserved for Congress):

“To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”

Here is the text of the 14th Amendment, Section 1:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

There is a comprehensive article written by Mark Levin in 2005 that provides history of Immigration legislation and Supreme Court rulings that can be found here but this is a pertinent quote that supports my viewpoint.

“If there is one area of law that should be universally understood as being largely outside the purview of the Supreme Court’s social engineering reach, it is immigration. Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”

US Representative Steve King, R-Kiron, Iowa, seems to agree that Obama’s recent decision is in conflict with the US Constitution.

“SIOUX CITY | U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Kiron, Iowa, said he may sue President Barack Obama to halt the administration’s revised immigration policy announced Friday.”

“It’s no longer a discussion or debate about immigration. It’s a discussion about separation of powers. It’s about the survival of the Constitution,” King said.”

“The Obama policy, which takes effect immediately and does not require congressional approval, gives some illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children a chance to stay in the country and work.”

“Some of the elements in the revised policy mirror the so-called “DREAM Act,” which sought to give legal status to young immigrants and those who finished high school or college or were in the military. The act has repeatedly failed in Congress.”

“King, the vice chairman of a House subcommittee for immigration and border issues, said Obama is trying to go around Congress to get parts of the DREAM Act enacted, contrary to constitutional rules. He said the rule change should have had legislative approval. “

“If Congress says no, the president cannot say yes,” he said.”

For full disclosure here, I don’t have much of an issue with the substance of the new edict Obama issued since I’ve stated before that I believe we need a Federal program to provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants (who are law abiding) AFTER we secure the border.  It is unfair to penalize children who had no part in this illegal activity (entering the US illegally) and if the families are law abiding and contributing to society, both economically and socially, then we should welcome them as citizens but we must also secure the borders to prevent future illegal immigrants from taking advantage of this one time course correction.

My problem with Obama’s recent edict is with the method that it was carried out.  Obama’s edict is very similar to the Dream Act which, in many forms, has been repeatedly rejected by Congress and since immigration laws reside with the Congress, Obama’s move on Friday bypassed the Constitution.

I don’t know what motivated Obama to perform this illegal act.  It could be that he is pandering for Latino voters who, overwhelmingly voted for him in 2008, have recently become upset with his administrations inability to provide on their campaign promises.  It could be that Obama knew Florida Senator Marco Rubio was working on similar Legislation and the President wanted to short circuit the Legislative process and steal a victory from Republicans. 

“The news jumps ahead of Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, who has been working on a similar proposal for three months but had yet to release the details, and puts him and other Republicans who said they are open to helping young immigrants in an awkward spot.”

“Today’s announcement will be welcome news for many of these kids desperate for an answer, but it is a short-term answer to a long-term problem,” Rubio said. “And by once again ignoring the Constitution and going around Congress, this short-term policy will make it harder to find a balanced and responsible long-term one.”

I don’t care about Obama’s motivations or whether this move was the “right thing” to do or not.  We are a nation that lives by the rule of law and the leader of the US just violated our most cherished legal document – The US Constitution. 

If we see the President of the US ignore the rule of law then what message does that send to the US citizens?  If we don’t like the progressive tax structure, can we refuse to pay a part or all of our Federal tax dollars?  Can US citizens start carrying firearms in public without obtaining proper permits?  If we don’t agree with Roe v. Wade, can Pro-Life supports start killing doctors that perform abortions?  Are speed limits no longer the law but merely suggestions?  If the President can ignore laws that are enacted by elected officials then who’s to say average citizens can’t do the same thing?

This is troubling for a nation that is already flirting with a culture of anarchism.  Occupy has demonstrated their desire to overthrow Capitalism, Black Panthers have stated that they will dispense their own justice by offering a bounty on the head of George Zimmerman and Leftists are obsessed with Socialistic thought about Income Inequality and everyone paying their fair share.

Obama just showed the country that he is more interested in being re-elected than obeying the rule of law and that should cause every US citizen to think seriously about their vote in November.

Posted in Immigration, politics | 5 Comments

No, The Private Sector Is Not Doing Fine

Posted on 13-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

We all know that Obama revealed his true agenda last Friday when he stated that “The Private sector is doing fine” and he urged us to focus on more Public sector hiring.  I wrote a previous post debunking that theory but there have been further Leftist blog postings supporting the President’s position. 

Ezra Klein wrote an article supporting the President’s call for more Public sector hiring and he even provided a graph showing how Public sector hiring in the latest recession has lagged behind the previous 3 recessions. 

I sent a tweet out wondering why Mr. Klein’s graph was so different from the Heritage Blog graph which is shown below.

To his credit, he replied to me and I was much appreciative of that!

He is right that the Heritage graph broke up the Federal, State and Local government employment deltas and there are many more in the State and Local levels than the Federal so the overall employment deltas (which Mr. Klein reported) is weighted in favor of the State and Local numbers.  Mr. Klein even wrote a subsequent blog post where he referenced my tweet question and explained it in more detail.

“The answer is that the federal government, state governments, and local governments do not employ the same number of workers. According to the latest figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the federal government has 2,800,000 employees. State governments employ 5,000,000 workers, and local governments have 14,000,000 workers, largely because local governments are the ones who employ teachers. So the federal workforce can grow even as the total number of government workers falls.”

“And that’s exactly what’s been happening. The BLS has a data series — CES9000000001, in case you’re interested — tracking all government workers. It includes state, local and federal workers. And it reports that in February 2009, there were 22,577,000 government workers, and in May 2012, there were 21,969,000 government workers, for a total loss of 608,000 workers. Over the same period, the total number of private-sector workers, in case you’re interested, rose from 110,260,000 to 111,040,000, for a gain of 780,000 workers.”

Fair enough.  His graph referenced all Public sector employment and indeed this segment of the economy has seen a lower employment recovery in this recession as compared to the previous 3 recessions.

But here is my issue.  The State and Local employment numbers are particularly bleak during this recession because the Private sector employment numbers are horrendous and if the Private sector (which far outnumbers the Public sector) isn’t employed then they aren’t paying State and Local taxes so these governments must make cuts to stay within budget.  Hiring more Public sector workers is not the solution out of this problem but more a symptom of this problem.  And the main problem is that Keynesian economics has failed us miserably during this ‘recovery’ and I’ll prove it below.

Let’s first look at the last four recessions and I determined their starting points using the Wikipedia link here and the Bureau of Economic Analysis here.

From these links, the last 4 recessions started on January 1980, July 1990, March 2001 and July 2008.  I then used the Bureau of Labor Statistics report LNS12000000 at the following site to get monthly employment data for the Private sector.  We have data up to May 2012 and that is 46 months from the start of the last recession so that is the time frame I’ll use to compare this recession ‘recovery’ with the recoveries from the prior 3 recessions.

Here is the graph of Private sector employment changes from the start of the last 4 recessions.

Sure enough, you can see that the Private sector has not rebounded like the previous 3 recessions and this would explain why Public sector employment has also not rebounded like we’ve seen in the past.  We simply don’t have the tax revenue flowing into State and Local governments so they have to tighten their belts and delay hiring.

Private sector employment far outnumbers Public sector employment so this is a better metric to measure how well we have recovered from a recession.  Public sector employment will take care of itself as long as we focus on the Private sector but unfortunately Obama, Pelosi and Reid have failed the recognize this.

Posted in economics, politics | 4 Comments

The Revelation of the Leftist Agenda

Posted on 11-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

According to Media Matters for America (MMfA), recession recoveries usually see an uptick in hiring in the Public Sector but the latest recovery bucks that trend.  From their twitter account we see this picture.

So MMFA are like totally ok with Obama saying “the Private sector is doing fine” and we need to hire more people to work in the public sector (i.e. Government payrolls) because we’ve done that in the past and it worked. 

But there is another graph that also shows the percent change in employment post-recession for this recovery (if you can call it a recovery) and it indeed shows State and Local employment shrinking by 1-3% just like the MMfA graph but the story is radically different when we look at percent change in employment in the Federal government.  Here is a graph from the Heritage Foundation article showing what this “Recovery” has done to employment changes in the various sectors.

Without seeing the links to MMfA’s data, I can’t say for certain why they are different but I can say for certain that MMfA chose not to highlight the massive increase in Federal Government hiring and the fact that the Private sector is still doing worse than the State and Local sectors.  I wonder why they did that?

It’s because the statements by Obama last Friday were not a ‘gaffe’ (which would mean the statement was taken out of context or he said something that he didn’t mean) but a true revelation of how Obama thinks about the economy.  The goal of the Left has always been to move us closer to Socialism and build up the Government payrolls while decreasing the Private sector and in Obama’s view, the decline in Private sector employment is ‘fine’ to him because that is what his worldview endorses. 

Obama and his chief mouthpiece, David Axlerod, had ample opportunity to walk back Friday’s statement but instead they just deflected the questions.  They realized they made a mistake in revealing their true intentions to the American Public and now they are exposed.   

Even Leftist Paul Krugman admitted Obama screwed up in saying the private sector was doing fine but in trying to defend Obama’s revealing statement, he made statements that aren’t true.  His quote is shown below (emphasis mine): 

“That was an unfortunate line,” Krugman argued, “The President bungled the line.” He added that he did believe President Obama was making a larger and correct point about the fact that the public sector is faring far worse than the private, but that it got lost in the rhetoric. “The truth is the private sector is doing better than the public sector, which is still not good,” Krugman noted, concluded, “he screwed up the line.”

We already showed from the Heritage graph where the Private sector job gain percentages are still much worse than the Public sector (Local, State and Federal) so that statement is just false.  But notice Krugman again doubled down on the Leftist theology that it is “not good” that the Private sector is doing better than the Public sector.  Even if the Private sector was doing better than the public sector- which it isn’t – that would actually be good but Leftists don’t think so.

Liberals have been trying to conceal their true intentions for decades and if there is one good thing that has come from the Obama/Pelosi/Reid regime, it is the revelation of their truly socialistic agenda.

Posted in economics, politics | 1 Comment

Global Temperature and CO2 Update – June 2012

Posted on 09-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

I have always been a skeptic of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory that states increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations , caused by humans, is causing our planet to rapidly warm and I have outlined the scientific basis of this skepticism on a previous post here.  I periodically give updated to CO2 and temperature data every 3 to 6 months and it’s time to do that again.

Here is the graph of atmospheric CO2 measurements as gathered by the Mauna Loa observatory and you can see that the CO2 levels are continuing to increase. 

Here are the plots of global temperature averages compiled by the Climate Research Unit and the University of Alabama Huntsville.   

Let’s now look at these same temperature graphs but starting with 1998 and you can easily see that we are still in a period of flat temperature growth.

Furthermore, if increasing atmospheric concentrations of CO2 causes increased global temperatures then we should see a linearly increasing line when we plot global temperature anomaly (delta from a baseline period) on the Y-axis and atmospheric CO2 concentration on the X-axis.  You can see that something happened around the 370 ppm point to stop that trend.

So there is no change from my March update on AGW and Earth is refusing to conform to the dire predictions of the AGW cult.

Carry on.

Posted in Climate Change | 6 Comments

The Reality of Socialism

Posted on 07-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

Last fall, when the Occupy kids moved out of their parents’ basements and into Zuccotti Park, there seemed to be a troubling groundswell of support amongst their filth to overthrow our current economic system, Capitalism, and replace it with Socialism.  To hear this heretical talk coming from our young adults would have been unheard of 20 years ago but we even had grown adults advocating the US embrace Socialism.  Do these idiots really know what they are asking for? 

I’ve written about the evils of Socialism as evidenced by stories from Cuba as well as the United States’ forays into socialism such as when we think the Government can control supply and demand better than the Free Market.    I’ve also written about the benefits of Capitalism and how, when you look throughout history, this is the fairest form of economic system we have.  But there are still those out there who think Socialism is the path for America and they need look no further than this recent NPR report from China to see the warnings that this fascist system delivers. 

Here are some quotes from the NPR article (emphasis mine).

“A deceptively simple question has become an obsession for Chinese artist Yang Weidong: “What do you need?”

“For the past four years, Yang has posed the question to more than 300 Chinese intellectuals, and the results illustrate a startling level of discontent among China’s thinkers.”

“As for the answer, one word pops up time and time again.”

“I need freedom,” says writer Chang Ping.”

“I need freedom of speech,” says economist Mao Yushi.”

“I need freedom of expression,” says poet Ye Kuangzheng.”

“Of China’s thinkers, more than 95 percent of those I interviewed need freedom, though they used different ways to express this,” says Yang.”

“We live in a ridiculous society,” says Yang, 46. “Now we Chinese people are pigs. At the most basic level, two people who are married don’t even have the right to have babies. You have to be allowed. You will eat whatever they feed you. They ask you to be happy, and you’re happy. They don’t let you think.“

Socialism sounds pretty oppressive and the opposite of Freedom/Liberty so why would anyone advocate for this kind of system?  I can see someone advocating for Socialism if he is a dictator or in a leadership position of the ruling government because those people are usually very wealthy and play by different sets of rules than the ones imposed on ordinary citizens.  But why would those, who are obviously not in powerful government positions, push for Socialism?  It could be that they are too stupid to look outside their propaganda literature or question their college professors to see what Socialism looks like in the real world but I think it mainly comes from ignorance. 

I think many Leftists get enchanted with the idea of Socialism magically redistributing wealth and taking money from the evil 1% and giving it to the other 99%.  The Occupy movement is also keen on eliminating Crony Capitalism (which, by the way, is the ONLY point of Occupy that I agree with) so perhaps they believe that under Socialism the wealth will be better distributed and we can prevent the evil 1% from gaining more wealth through political influence.  Let’s see how that redistribution of wealth and elimination of crony capitalism are working in China – More from the NPR article:

“China is now a union of power and money,” says Wang Kang, the scholar. “Power is especially expressed in Beijing. Look at those advantaged groups: the princelings and the state-owned corporations. They’re all dazzlingly rich. A large part of China’s historical dividend has been swallowed by a small minority.”

“What part of this is socialism?” Wang continues. “It’s never been socialist. It’s fake socialism. It’s the opposite of socialism.”

“I need freedom myself. I can’t leave the country. My freedom of movement is restricted. I also need my freedom to create,” he says.”

Oh, it appears that under real world conditions, Socialism results in a concentration of power and money at the top and the vast majority of the population is poor and basically living like slaves.  Doesn’t this sound like the Occupy hyperbole definition of America under Capitalism?  If they really want to see what oppression and Fascism looks like then they need to do more research into countries that are embracing Socialism.

This is the truth that Occupy fails to see – Real world implementation of Socialism always devolves into Fascism that translates into very limited Freedom for its citizens.   Socialism sounds great in a college class room but fails when put into practice with real humans because we aren’t designed to behave like that.

Human DNA is hard wired for competition since, in the early development of our species, only those who triumphed over their competition won the right to breed and eat.  They passed their genes down to us and American Capitalism has tapped that energy source to become the wealthiest nation in the world. 

Humans are happier when we are allowed to excel, be creative and chart our own course.  We have an innate bent to freedom and individual expression that manifests itself in our desire to make our own way in the world and succeed.  We have desires to explore and innovate that have not only led to discovery of new worlds but developed products that improve our quality of life (like the device you are currently using to read this blog post as well as the medium it is being transmitted over – Internet). 

It’s obvious to even casual observers of the human race that we have a yearning for freedom and self expression but make no mistake about it; there is no room for that in Socialism.  You perform the job that the State tells you to perform, you produce only what they tell you to produce, you get paid what they want to pay you and you are not free to act on your own desires. 

Is this really what Occupy wants?  Is this really what America wants?  I think not.  Or rather, I *hope* not because that isn’t the economic system I want my children to live in.  Overwhelming the Social Security, Welfare and Healthcare systems, pushing income inequality (the wealthy aren’t paying their fair share, etc.) and raising taxes on corporations/individuals to support government handouts are all steps that we are taking not only toward Euro style socialism but full blown Socialism.    

That is why we fight now against Liberals and their useful idiots in the Occupy movement.  Remember that Socialism (and eventually Fascism) is based on ignorance and always comes from the Left.  Do not let any form of Socialism put down roots but instead, pull it out of the ground, publically humiliate it and using facts, destroy its lies before they have time to spread.

Posted in economics, politics | Leave a comment

Union Busting Wisconsin Style

Posted on 05-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

The Governor Scott Walker Recall election is over and #Wiunion was dealt a resounding defeat that will diminish Union influence for years, if not decades, to come.  Like many, I called this beat down in early May when the party primaries concluded and revealed that Governor Walker received almost as many votes (in an uncontested primary) as all 5 of the Democratic candidates received in their highly popular primary.  Only those who are easily fooled, like those who belong to unions, didn’t see this coming.

Here’s a screencap of the results with 95% reporting from Ace of Spades HQ website (To Quote #Wiunion – This is what Democracy looks like!).

In case you haven’t followed this political war in Wisconsin over the past 2 years, Unions were upset when Walker and the Wisconsin state legislature ended collective bargaining with the state’s public sector unions.  Collective bargaining between state unions and politicians is wrong and the arguments are outlined well in this Washington Examiner piece:

“A law granting public-sector unions monopoly bargaining privileges gives a union, a special interest group, two bites at the apple. First, it uses its political clout to elect public officials. Then it negotiates with the very same officials.”

“Not only is there no right to collective bargaining in public employment, it is wrong. Collective bargaining distorts and corrupts democratic government.”

“Collective bargaining is a process for employer-employee relations that was (sic) designed for the private sector. This process served as the model for the development of public-sector collective bargaining without taking into account the fundamental differences between the two sectors.”

“Government is inherently a monopoly. If you don’t like a decision of government, you can’t check with the competition to see whether you can get a decision more to your liking. Business, on the other hand, is competitive. If you don’t like the cars being made by one manufacturer, you can check with another to see whether you can find one you like better.”

It’s obvious that there is a conflict of interest when Public Sector Unions influence who gets elected and then negotiate with these same politicians to gain sweet heart deal benefits that the tax payers can’t veto.  State governments are a monopoly and there is no other competitor for the taxpayers to patronize.  The politicians are playing with the tax payer dollars and giving it to the public sector unions who, in turn, contribute to their reelection campaigns.  It’s obvious that this is a conflict of interest and Governor Walker and the Wisconsin Legislature was right in removing this process.

Unions have also come to the false realization that collective bargaining is a “right” but as this Heritage article states, they are very wrong and a Federal Court ruling backs that up.

“Similarly the freedom of association is a right shared by all Americans and protected by the First Amendment. In contrast, collective bargaining is a special power occasionally granted to some unions. In upholding North Carolina’s ban on government union collective bargaining, a federal court wrote in Atkins vs. City of Charlotte: “All citizens have the right to associate in groups to advocate their special interests to the government. It is something entirely different to grant any one interest group special status and access to the decision making process.”

“Gov. Scott Walker’s (R) budget bill in Wisconsin in no way infringes on any Americans’ right to associate and lobby government. What it does do is allow Wisconsin employees to choose not to join a union and keep their job at the same time. It also forces the government unions in Wisconsin to collect their own union dues instead of using the power of the state to withhold them directly from employee paychecks.”

This latest defeat of Unions shows just how out of touch they are with reality.

“Labor unions and collective bargaining are important tools. There are good reasons to form unions. But unions must be reasonable. If the customer is not happy with a union’s performance, or if the cost of doing business becomes too high — whether the customer is the state of Wisconsin or otherwise — then unions must make reasonable compromises.”

“Collective bargaining is, after all, about negotiation.”

“Half a century ago, when most members of unions worked in dangerous conditions for low pay in factories or mines, it was fair for labor to demand justice. It is still fair for unions representing the mistreated, such as those who work as hotel maids or clean offices, to demand justice.”

“But today’s government employees are not mistreated. For today’s government employees to occupy the Wisconsin statehouse and turn red in the face angrily shouting demands shows public-sector unions have become spoiled and out of touch. That needs to change.”

Fortunately, the adult thinkers in Wisconsin made the right decision tonight and sent a message to the rest of the country that out of control spending and pandering to outdated Unions must be stopped!

In conclusion, I’d like to share some of the tweets from #Wiunion supporters that I saw over the past week.  You can not only see how out of touch they are with reality but also see their desperation and ignorance of how this election would turn out.  Let this be a lesson to those who are weighing the benefits that Unions offer in this modern era.

@SpudLovr and @unkybunky were some of the more prolific #Wiunion supporters on twitter and although they blocked me months ago, go check out their timelines for some laughs.

Of course, this #Wiunion supporter ignores the millions of dollars that Unions all across America poured into Wisconsin to defeat Walker.  These dollars were wasted and will not be available for Obama’s campaign so this is another example of Union fail.

Like this will matter.  The only positive to this is the fact that drunken #Wiunion voters won’t get a DUI or kill anyone on their way home.

This guy is actually using the state of Illinois as his ‘gold standard’ for how a state is to be run.  Sad.

When I pay my tax dollars to my state I do care about how that money is spent and it is not ok with me if my state uses my money to offer sweetheart deals to public sector unions when I don’t have a seat at the negotiating table.

Nice energy Bill Clinton brought, huh?  At least Clinton had the guts to show up in Wisconsin and defend his base.  This can’t be said of Obama who kept himself far away from #Wiunion.   I wonder if union members in Wisconsin will remember this in November.

This person says that Governor Walker is “probably” a criminal.  This is typical of Leftists who are quick to judge without looking at the facts first.

Really?  This is how you finish a fight?  By getting your ass kicked?  Public Sector Unions did offer concessions early in Governor Walker’s term but they refused to give up their right to collective bargaining.

“Top leaders of two of Wisconsin’s largest public employee unions announced they are willing to accept the financial concessions called for in Walker’s plan, but will not accept the loss of collective bargaining rights.”

Sorry, but those are not concessions we can live with now.

The Boy Scout motto is “Be Prepared” and I think Governor Walker held up to that pledge quite well!  Here is the Boy Scout Oath and Law and I think a few Leftists and Union members could benefit society by adhering to these values.

Scout Oath

On my honor I will do my best
to do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
to help other people at all times;
to keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

Scout Law

A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.

Notice this Lincoln quote doesn’t mention the word “union” after labor.

This tweet comes from the Wisconsin Democratic Communications Director and it’s unclear if he is attempting to draw on a metaphor from David and Goliath or telling #Wiunion supporters to use these as weapons against Walker supporters.

This tweet represents the ultimate in #Wiunion denial and ignorance.

Yea, because who needs Balanced Budgets and Low Unemployment rates?  You Right Wingers take that crap to another state!

Obama’s coat tails aren’t what they used to be.  There is a reason Obama has steered clear of Wisconsin in an effort to give Barrett the highest probability of success that he can.  Plus Obama is looking out for himself and doesn’t want another defeat tacked onto his already growing resume of failure.

For two years the #Wiunion radicals whined and cried about having their goody baskets taken away from them and now the people of Wisconsin have spoken.  Unions are outdated and on the path to irrelevance and this election just proved that.  Let’s hope this Wisconsin election is the “canary in the cave” that signals the beginning of the end of Leftist policies in both State and Federal governments.

Posted in politics, unionthugs | 7 Comments

Never Give Up

Posted on 04-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

Lately I have noticed a ton of depressing stories in the news that makes me weep for our future.  It makes me wonder why we fight for Liberties, Justice and Morality because it seems we are losing the battle.

Here are just a few of the recent stories from my local area.

It’s enough to make you want to throw up your hands and give up but I have two children so giving up is not an option.  It is my duty as a citizen and a father to leave this world in better shape for them and give them the best opportunity for success.  That is why I’ll never give up and why I will continue to fight on Twitter, on Facebook, in church, on this blog, at the voting booth and in the streets if necessary.  I will never give up!

In case you haven’t figured it out yet, we are at war.  We’re in a war against the socialistic ideology of the Left and against the moral depravity of those who want to strip our country from its founding principles.  We can no longer sit on the sidelines and leave the fight up to the politicians.  Get involved.

 

Posted in politics, South Carolina | Leave a comment

Venus Transit

Posted on 03-Jun-2012 by Highvoltage

 

 

 

 

 

On June 5th the planet Venus will pass directly between Earth and the Sun and we can see the planet’s silhouette on the Sun.  Check out the following site to see what this looked like in 2004 (the last time this happened) to get a preview of what we’ll see. 

Sky and Telescope has a great article on this historic event as well as advice on how to view it safely and what times this event will happen in your area. 

I can’t stress enough to read up on the links above and make sure you view this monumental event in a safe manner.  I have a 10” Newtonian Reflector and I won’t be able to use the projection method because I could damage the optics of my telescope unless I reduce the diameter of the scope with a shield or use a specially designed filter.  I’ll probably use my binoculars on a tripod to project this image unless I can find some #14 arc welding glass to view it directly. 

The next time Venus will perform this act will be in the year 2117 so this truly is a once in a lifetime event!  Don’t let it pass you by.

Posted in astronomy | 1 Comment

Catch-22 For The Left

Posted on 31-May-2012 by Highvoltage

Republican sponsored House Resolution 3541, Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA), failed to achieve the 2/3rds majority required for passage today with a final vote total of 246 Yeas to 168 Nays but while this appears to be a defeat for the Republican controlled House of Representatives, it is actually a win.

Before I get to that, let’s first take a look at the Bill.  The full text of PRENDA can be viewed here but here is the important part:

Sec. 250. Discrimination against the unborn on the basis of race or sex

`(a) In General- Whoever knowingly–

`(1) performs an abortion knowing that such abortion is sought based on the sex, gender, color or race of the child, or the race of a parent of that child;

`(2) uses force or the threat of force to intentionally injure or intimidate any person for the purpose of coercing a sex-selection or race-selection abortion;

`(3) solicits or accepts funds for the performance of a sex-selection abortion or a race-selection abortion; or

`(4) transports a woman into the United States or across a State line for the purpose of obtaining a sex-selection abortion or race-selection abortion;

or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

The PRENDA Bill sought to make it illegal to perform an abortion when the sole reason for that abortion was due to the gender or race of the child in the womb.  For example, if someone was hoping for a boy but they were carrying a girl then HR 3541 would make it illegal to kill the baby for that sole reason.  Sounds pretty cut and dry to me.  This Bill should’ve passed with an overwhelming majority.  What are we?  China?

Apparently so because a majority of Democrats (161 nays vs. 20 yeas) and a few Republicans (7 nays vs. 226 yeas) voted against this Bill (you can check your representatives here to see how they voted) and kept it from passing.

It probably was apparent, before the vote, that there weren’t enough votes to pass HR 3541 but I commend the Republican leadership for bringing it up for a vote because this Bill put the Democrats in a no-win situation.

If they voted for the Bill then they would be admitting that there is at least one reason that can’t be used to justify an abortion – killing a baby based purely on the sex or race of the child.  Once Democrats admitted this, then they would be placing their foot on a very slippery slope that would lead to the total breakdown of their pro Abortion arguments.  If they admit that the baby has ‘life’ and shouldn’t be killed in this instance then why should we kill the same baby for other reasons such as birth control? 

If the Democrats voted against the Bill (like many of them did) then they would be saying it is perfectly fine to have an abortion to control what sex your child is.  Gee, we already have a girl and really wanted a boy to balance the family out so let’s go to the doctor and kill this one and try again.  Doesn’t this position sound heinous and evil?  Yes it does and this is the exact position that 161 Democrats and 7 Republicans just admitted to endorsing with their votes today.

And how did President Obama weigh in on this Bill?  From Jake Tapper’s news blog:

“White House deputy press secretary Jamie Smith says in a statement: “The Administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but the end result of this legislation would be to subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision. The government should not intrude in medical decisions or private family matters in this way.”

A Nay vote on HR 3541 is indefensible on basic human rights terms and do not let them forget it in November.   

Posted in politics | 1 Comment

Is The American Dream Over?

Posted on 31-May-2012 by Highvoltage

American Exceptionalism is the theory that the United States of America was the first nation created with liberty, equal rights and laissez-faire all rolled into one.  American Exceptionalism believes that the fierce adherence to these ideals can lead to the fairest form of government where a person’s lot in life is dependent on what he chooses to make of it, not what socioeconomic class he was born into.   

Is that really true?  Can someone’s destiny be altered by his hard work, ingenuity and creativity?  Is one’s success truly independent of the situation he was born into?  In my opinion, yes!  When America truly embraces liberty, equal rights and laissez-faire then a person’s limitations become only what he places on himself.  Throughout American history there are countless examples of people overcoming socioeconomic roadblocks and becoming successful and I am one of those (more on that later).   

But is American Exceptionalism still alive?  From an NPR article:

“The American Dream is a crucial thread in this country’s tapestry, woven through politics, music and culture.”

“Though the phrase has different meanings to different people, it suggests an underlying belief that hard work pays off and that the next generation will have a better life than the previous generation.”

“But three years after the worst recession in almost a century, the American Dream now feels in jeopardy to many.”

Alexis De Tocqueville wrote a book in the early 1830’s called “Democracy in America” and the following site reviews this book and there is a key take-away below that seems to have predicted the downfall of American Exceptionalism:

“De Tocqueville saw the potential flaw in the American ideology which included the concepts of both liberty and equality. He saw that there would come a time when liberty would conflict with the American passion for equality. He saw that through the exercise of liberty, some citizens would prosper more than others. As the citizens became aware of increasing economic and social differentiation between themselves and their neighbors, they would view their neighbors’ success as developing inequality and would demand a return to the perceived equality of the past.”

Even in 1830, Alexis De Tocqueville saw that Obama and other Leftists would use the Income Inequality meme to garner support for their socialistic ideas.  You can’t have liberty and a passion for equality without the have-nots feeling disgruntled by the haves.  This condition will happen everywhere but there used to be a time in America when the have-nots saw the success of the haves and it motivated those in the lower income demographics to work harder, innovate and be creative to attain the wealth of those they envied.  Now the narrative has turned to taking money from the successful (via taxes) and giving it to others in an effort to be ‘fair’ and level the income distribution.  That is not the American way!

I grew up in a household that fell in the socioeconomic definition between poor and middle class.  My parents worked hard, taught me fiscally conservative principles and beat it into my head that I was going to have a better life than they had.  I was going to go to college and start out ahead of where my parents started and not have to struggle day to day like they did.  By the time I was in high school, there was no doubt in my mind that I was not only going to graduate from college but be more successful (in monetary terms) than my parents.  It is a testament to their parenting skills and their love for their children that both of their kids went on to fulfill that prophesy and my brother and I are indeed better off than our parents. 

Did I envy those who were more successful than my parents?  Sure.  But I never once thought that the ‘fair’ thing to do was to take money from them and give it to me.  I have held a steady job since I was 16 years old and worked throughout most of my high school years and all of my college years to help pay for my education.  My envy of the more successful was my motivation to work harder and become what I am today and this work ethic is what I hope to pass on to my children.

This used to be the essence of American Exceptionalism – the next generation was going to be more successful than the previous one because they were going to build upon the wealth created by their parents, work harder, become more educated and move up the ladder.

But sadly, I have come to the realization that unless the course of the United States is altered, the dream of the next generation becoming more successful than the previous generation is dead.  As a parent, I echo the conversations that my parents had with me – you will go to college and you will be more successful than your parents – but I have serious doubts that this prophesy is still true.

We have to reverse the Leftist teachings that have infiltrated our youth for generations which promotes a nanny state where the government will be there to ensure ‘equality’ while forgetting that liberty carries with it responsibility.  You are free to choose your career and this choice is affirmed in the Declaration of Independence as the “pursuit” of happiness but this should not be confused with a “guarantee” of happiness.  If you make unwise choices then the laissez-faire market will punish you for your poor decisions and the government does not exist to reward mediocre performance or unwise business decisions but that is exactly what the federal government is doing today. 

I have written a previous blog post entitled “Is This How We Run A Country” where I show that over 90% of all federal tax revenues go to fund Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Food Stamps and Unemployment.  Is this really the model for American Exceptionalism?   Here is a quote from the blog post:

“From the latest IRS income tax revenue data, we can see that 51.8% of the total filers pay 98.2% of all the Federal Income Tax.  This means roughly half of Americans work to pay benefits for the other 50%.  Is that how we’d set up a country if we were to start over?”

I am sure that the patriots who started this country never envisioned the federal government taking money from half of the population and giving it to the other half but that is exactly where we are right now.  American Exceptionalism can’t be defended under the current government structure and I agree that this theory is dead right now.  But I believe we can get back to a place where American Exceptionalism is alive by throwing out all politicians (Federal, State and Local) who subscribe to the nanny state policies that have prospered over the past few decades and fix the real issues that plague America. 

Social Security and Welfare programs must be reformed. 

Crony Capitalism must be stopped. 

Over regulation that is killing business and innovation must be suspended. 

The benefits of Capitalism must be promoted and the evils of Keynesian Economics should be exposed. 

Once American citizens start electing fiscally and economically conservative representatives, we’ll return to a place where we can honestly tell our children that they have the opportunity to live a more successful life than their parents.

Posted in economics, Entitlement Programs, politics | 7 Comments

Another Example of Team Obama Incompetence

Posted on 29-May-2012 by Highvoltage

Imagine this scenario – A citizen (call him John) from a foreign country (call it Stupidstan) helps out the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) by pinpointing the whereabouts of one of our most hated enemies (call him Bin Lyin).  The US obtains valuable intelligence from John, plans a military mission into Stupidstan and kills Bin Lyin.  What happens to the informant after the mission?  If you guessed that the US would abandon John, allow John’s identity to fall into Stupidstan authorities’ hands and then sit on the sidelines as Stupidstan tortures and sentences John to 33 years in prison, then you need to get a job with the Obama administration.

In case you missed it, this hypothetical scenario actually happened.  The US used Intel from Dr. Shakil Afridi last year that enabled the US military to attack the compound of Osama Bin Laden and ultimately kill the terrorist.  Shortly after that successful mission, the lives of Dr. Afridi and his family turned into a nightmare that they have yet to awaken and that nightmare reached a new level a few days when Dr. Afridi was sentenced to 33 years in prison for Treason against Pakistan.

Unbelievable!  Let’s see how badly Team Obama screwed this up.

From the Daily Mail:

“Shortly after the raid which killed Bin Laden, Dr. Afridi was arrested for conspiring against the state of Pakistan, his house was sealed and all assets frozen.”

“A commission recommended a charge of conspiracy against Pakistan and high treason.
US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta confirmed in January that Dr Afridi collected DNA in an effort to help locate Bin Laden but added he ‘was not in any way treasonous towards Pakistan. For them to take this kind of action against somebody who was helping to go after terrorism is a real mistake’.”

“Dr Afridi had no right to legal representation, to present evidence or cross-examine witnesses. He must also pay a £2,300 fine or serve a further three-and-a-half years in jail.”

“US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called for his release.”

Wow, that’s what I call forceful action from Mrs. Clinton.  If that is all it takes, why didn’t you call for Pakistan to hand over Osama Bin Laden and we could’ve avoided this whole mess?  That’s right, they don’t care what we want and they laugh at your empty threats.

Oh, it now appears that Dr. Afridi was tortured prior to his prison sentence being handed down.  From Fox News:

“The Pakistani doctor sentenced last week to 33 years in prison for helping track Usama bin Laden suffered torture, isolation and starvation during his interrogation, his brother told Fox News — as he made an appeal from the family for the U.S. Embassy to help fight his legal case.”

“Jamil Afridi said security forces insiders told him his brother was tortured during the interrogation. Afridi was so emaciated when he arrived at prison after last week’s conviction that he has put on five pounds just from being fed properly, his brother said.”

“The interrogation apparently is over. The brother said that based on what he was told by security forces, Dr. Afridi’s conditions are “paradise” in comparison to what he experienced before.”

“But even after that ordeal, one Pakistani security official told Fox News that Afridi continues to be kept in isolation in a six-foot-by-four-foot cell.”

“According to the brother, the family is still being denied visits to him in jail. During the year prior to his sentencing, Afridi did not see sunlight while held by his interrogators, his brother said.”

“The official also said the jail is facing a potential riot among its 2,000 inmates because militants among them have gotten word that Afridi is being held there. The wardens have also received death threats from militants, the official said.”

It’s obvious that Osama Bin Laden had been living comfortably in Pakistan for quite some time and maybe he kept a residence there starting when the US attacked/invaded Afghanistan.  It’s also obvious that the Obama administration had more than just a little suspicion that Bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan with the government’s approval or the US would’ve alerted Pakistan to their plans prior to violating Pakistani air space with the night time raid on the Bin Laden compound.  So knowing all this, I have a few questions for Team Obama:

How did the Pakistani government learn of Dr. Afridi’s assistance with the DNA sampling program?

What steps did the US take to ensure Dr. Afridi’s safety?

Why didn’t we give asylum to Dr. Afridi and his family?

What steps are you now taking to ensure the release of Dr. Afridi from prison?

What steps are you now taking to ensure the safety of Dr. Afridi’s family?

This POTUS job is a lot harder than being a community organizer, right?

You’d think that the one success of Obama’s 3+ years in office would be handled with a little more care but instead this major “Win” has the potential to blow up and turn into a huge loss.  It is now evident that Obama cared more about spiking the football than recognizing (and protecting!) the guy who passed him the ball.  The incompetence of the Obama administration is an embarrassment to the whole country.  January 2013 can’t get here fast enough.

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

Obama Tries To Silence Conservative Voices

Posted on 27-May-2012 by Highvoltage

Jake Tapper from ABC News has a recent post on his blog showing how the Obama campaign paranoia has reached a tipping point by asking their followers to inform on their fellow citizens and using debunked Leftist claims in their campaign literature.

“An email from the Obama campaign encapsulates the problem when political campaigns seize the language of fact checkers, muddying the waters.”

“In the note, sent later in the day today, Obama campaign deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter invites supporters to “report an attack” at the Truth Team report page.”

“Received a robo-call or an email forward full of falsehoods?” the page asks. “Found a misleading leaflet in your mail? Tell us about it, and help fight back against the attacks on President Obama and his record.”

“Cutter in her email hammers Mitt Romney for saying “Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history,” which she refutes with a Market Watch blog saying that federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since President Eisenhower.”

The Market Watch blog, which touted Obama as a very austere President, was discredited by many, including myself, and it is a sad commentary on the Obama campaign that they’d still be beating that drum.  But more troubling is the fact that they have set up a website for other Liberals to alert Team Obama when they encounter opinions that are counter to Obama’s.

It must be obvious to Team Obama that they can’t run a positive campaign on Obama’s accomplishments since their 3+ years in office have resulted in an anemic economy, a failed Stimulus package, a revelation of Obama’s flip-flops, broken promises,  over regulation, and the massive failure that is called Obamacare.

Now they hope to turn their lap dog followers into informants to help ridicule those who have dissenting opinions with Obama’s Leftist ideology and to accomplish this task, Team Obama has set up the following site. 

If you click on the “where did you hear or see the attack” button you’ll see the following options:

It’s important to note that Team Obama sees alternate opinions as “attacks” but this is consistent with someone who is paranoid and desperate.  This is the new tactic of the Left and I see it on social media as Liberals use the Twitter algorithms to silence conservative voices by reporting them as Spam and causing Twitter to temporarily deactivate their accounts. 

True Fascism always comes from the Left and don’t let anyone tell you any different.  America needs to send a strong message that this form of Fascism will not be tolerated but this will only happen if every Conservative gets involved by helping their local candidates secure victory in November.  Make it happen!

Posted in politics | 1 Comment

A Paradigm Shift In Space Exploration

Posted on 25-May-2012 by Highvoltage

 

Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) recently launched their unmanned orbiting vehicle, Dragon, into space and is planning a rendezvous with the International Space Station in less than 24 hours.  If this mission is a success, the picture I have pasted above will become iconic because it will mark the point where space exploration moved from the government sector (symbolized by the Space Shuttle) to the private sector (symbolized by the time lapse exhaust trail from the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket).

SpaceX is a private company started by Elon Musk and from the company’s website:

“In 2008, SpaceX won the NASA contract to replace the cargo transport function of the Space Shuttle with Falcon 9 and Dragon. President Obama and NASA Administrator Bolden decided in 2010 to outsource astronaut transport to the commercial sector. F9/Dragon is considered by many to be the leading system for that role.”

A successful mission will raise confidence that rockets and spacecraft can be designed, built and operated by private companies with help from NASA and will usher in a new era of spaceflight that has both short term and long term implications that I’ll explore with this post.

Short Term

 Global governments are struggling with massive debt and space programs are some of the first victims of austerity measures and the US experienced this with the retirement of the Shuttle program and other future cuts that most likely will affect a Mars Mission.  I am a person who believes that a vibrant space program is needed but I am also a fiscal conservative and realize we must make tough decisions to safeguard our future.  So having the space exploration/travel void filled by the private sector not only satisfies my scientific need to keep the space program going but also satisfies my economical need because it is my belief that the private sector can do a better job of space exploration than government entities.

To prove my point, let’s engage in a thought experiment.  Imagine if the airline industry was run by the Federal government which would mean that the design, manufacture and operation of all airlines would be under the control of the Federal Airline Administration (FAA).  This would mean that all employees – baggage handlers, flight attendants, mechanics, air traffic controllers, airport administrators and pilots – would be on the government payroll.  The design and manufacture of airplanes would be controlled by the FAA and ultimately tax dollars would fund all of this.  If you complain about flight delays and red tape now, just imagine how bad airline travel would be under full governmental control!

I envision the space industry morphing into something that resembles the current airline model where private companies control the business and the Federal government (through the FAA) sets the regulations.  Imagine the technological boom for the US when other private companies are able to enter this market and provide products that not only satisfy the demands of the scientific community (launching satellites, telescopes, probes, etc.) but also satisfy the public demands by providing flights into space.  The Free Market always does a better job of supplying the highest quality products at the lowest price that are delivered in the fastest time to a demanding market and the space industry should be no different.  Capitalism works and the Invisible Hand that Adam Smith spoke of works in all industries from bread, milk, cars and space exploration/travel.

Make no mistake, launching and recovering vehicles from space safely is orders of magnitude more complex than flying a person from point A to point B but much of the heavy lifting has been done by NASA (as well as other government space programs in Russia, Europe and Japan) and they stand ready to have private industries build on their solid foundation to take space exploration/travel to the next level. 

I really think the entrance of private industry to space exploration/travel could be the next “tech boom” that could jump start not only the US economy but economies around the world and lead to more focus on science and mathematical education in high school and college.  

Long Term

 Apart from the financial boom that I claim will be realized once private industries become involved in space flight, there is a larger, philosophical benefit that I think we’ll see from this paradigm shift in the space exploration/travel market.

In a previous post I asked the question what would be the implications to human life on Earth once we discovered life on another planet.  Would that revelation change the petty skirmishes counties we fight over?  Would we now think of ourselves as Earthlings instead of Americans, Indians, Afghans or Russians? 

Those question still stand but imagine a world where we have dozens of countries engaged in private sector space exploration/travel.  There would still need to be a regulatory body and NASA would need to be linked up with the space regulatory bodies of the other countries so that space travel is coordinated.  We can’t have rockets blasting off into space without coordination and regulation from other countries that are doing the same thing.  Imagine if every state in the US had its own version of the FAA and didn’t coordinate cross country flights with other states.  It would be pandemonium and the industry would quickly grind to a halt.

This increased cooperation and coordination would only benefit relations between other countries and move us from an isolationist worldview to a more inclusive worldview.    Space is not owned by any country on Earth but is shared and once dozens of countries have private companies launching vehicles into space we’d start to realize that the exploring and traveling throughout the cosmos requires a level of cooperation that we have never seen.

I’m not advocating a single World Government or anything like that – countries must still maintain their sovereignty – but I think that greater cooperation in a noble endeavor such as space exploration/travel will bring us closer together and relegate some of our current warring differences to the ash heap of history.  

Posted in astronomy, economics, general science, politics | 3 Comments

Obama is a Big Spender

Posted on 22-May-2012 by Highvoltage

For those of you who understand math and have read a newspaper during the past 3 years, the title of this post is not groundbreaking.  But for Leftists who struggle with math or for those who gobble up any Lefty blog post showering praise on Obama then this title is confusing to you.

Rex Nutting from Market Watch wrote a piece today that said all the Right Wing Nut Jobs were dead wrong about Obama being a big spender and, in fact, Obama is one of the most austere presidents in recent history.  Here are the key conclusions from Mr. Nutting’s column:

“Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending, an “inferno” of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children’s future. Even Democrats seem to think it’s true.”

“But it didn’t happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.”

How did Mr. Nutting come up with this trickeration and mathematical sleight of hand?  He attributes all of the 2009 spending (except the Stimulus) to Bush instead of Obama and he uses the year to year percent increases as his comparison metric.

It is true that the government spending of the president’s first year in office is mostly approved by the previous president but Obama supported and voted for the Tarp spending and he didn’t try to reign in any of this spending during 2009.  Obama actually wanted a larger stimulus in 2009 (to the tune of an additional $1 trillion) so that hardly sounds like someone who is austere and wanted to keep the US on a tight budget.  So attributing the spending of 2009 to Obama is completely fair in my book.

Since the spending for 2009 was so huge (an increase of 16% over 2008 when comparing per capita spending), the subsequent comparisons of 2010 to 2009 would indeed show a lower (or in this case negative) spending increase as will comparing 2011 to 2010.  But that doesn’t mean spending in 2010 and 2011 was reduced to pre 2009 levels and I’ll show that in a graph at the end of this post.  Using this comparative metric is a mathematical sleight of hand and is not indicative of reduced government spending.

I have already debunked this meme earlier in response to another hack job which tried to paint Obama as an austere president and I encourage you to read that post since there is not only more detail in the earlier post but I provided a link to my actual spreadsheet calculations.

The only additional graph I’ll show on this post will be the one below showing actual government spending (per capita in 2005 dollars) for each year since 1969.  There is no way you can look at the last 3 years and claim Obama isn’t spending our money like a drunken sailor on leave (all apologies to those in the Navy who like to blow off steam when off duty).

Posted in economics, politics | 15 Comments

Do Not Forget What The Left Owns

Posted on 21-May-2012 by Highvoltage

In the coming 5 months the Left and Team Obama will throw anything and everything at Romney in order to secure a second term but Conservatives must remain focused and keep the election message centered on two very key components that the Left owns – The Occupy Movement and The Economy.

The Occupy Movement

The Left totally owns the Occupy Movement and in case you don’t believe me let’s use their own words.    

From Pelosi (emphasis mine):

“During a press conference Thursday afternoon, House minority leader Nancy Pelosi praised those participating in the “Occupy Wall Street” protests.  “God bless them,” Pelosi said, “for their spontaneity. It’s independent … it’s young, it’s spontaneous, and it’s focused. And it’s going to be effective.”

“The message of the protesters is a message for the establishment everyplace,” said the House Democrats’ leader. “No longer will the recklessness of some on Wall Street cause massive joblessness on Main Street.”

From Obama (emphasis mine):

“President Obama continues to express his commitment to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. “

“The most important thing we can do right now is those of us in leadership letting people know that we understand their struggles and we are on their side, and that we want to set up a system in which hard work, responsibility, doing what you’re supposed to do, is rewarded,” Obama tells ABC News. “And that people who are irresponsible, who are reckless, who don’t feel a sense of obligation to their communities and their companies and their workers that those folks aren’t rewarded.”

The Occupy movement continued to show their true colors on Sunday when they stabbed a Chicago police officer.

“A Chicago police officer suffered a stab wound to the leg, Sunday, and three others were injured during a day of protests around the NATO summit.”

“Chicago police Supt. Garry McCarthy did not know what was used to stab the officer and became emotional when discussing the crowd with which his officers dealt.”

“If you think it’s easy to ask people to do what they did, it’s not,” he said, pausing to gain his composure. “Asking people to put themselves in harm’s way, knowing that they’re going to get assaulted, and to be able to stand there and take it, those guys were amazing.”

And in case some Leftist tells you this is some isolated instance and Occupy shouldn’t be judged by this single incidence, then tell them we’ll judge them on the full body of their work which consists of violence, intimidation, lawlessness and indecency.  Occupy is a group of anarchists who are dead set on the overthrow of Capitalism and eventually Western Civilization. 

So the Left absolutely owns the Occupy movement along with all the violent outcomes from their protests.  You can’t say that the Left only embraced the Occupy movement before they became violent because it was obvious to any thinking person what direction the Occupy movement was heading.  If you couldn’t see that Occupy was a violent organization with the sole purpose of overthrowing Capitalism then you aren’t fit for a leadership position in government.  More likely, the Left fully recognized the disrupting nature of Occupy and Team Obama thought the overzealous kids from their moms’ basements would be the perfect vessel to a) take peoples’ minds off the terrible job the Leftists have done with the economy and b) amplify Obama’s class warfare meme.  Unfortunately for the Left, once the kids got out of the basement, they got violent and gave Team Obama a huge black eye.

The Economy

We should all remember that on 03-FEB-12 Obama officially took ownership of the Economy.  On that date, Obama’s chief economic advisor stated:

“Further evidence that the economy is continuing to heal from the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression,” said a statement from Alan B. Krueger, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers.”

“It is critical that we continue the economic policies that are helping us to dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the recession that began at the end of 2007,” Krueger wrote on the White House blog.”

When Team Obama claimed that their policies turned the economy around then that places ownership of the future economy squarely at their feet.  I stated this position in a previous post:

“So there you have it. Obama’s chief economic advisor stated that the lower unemployment rate is a direct result of Obama’s policies and they will continue to enact these policies to improve the jobs situation going forward.”

“In engineering terms – If you claim that a system outputs have been altered based on your inputs then you make the claim that all prior inputs to the system have been swamped out (or eliminated) and you now have your hands firmly placed on the steering wheel of that system. You can’t claim credit for the positive effects and deflect blame to someone else for the negative effects once you make that claim.”

“Obama owns every piece of economic data that is produced from now until November when the election occurs. Do not let Liberals use the “we’re just fixing what Bush broke” meme ever again. Obama owns this economy now and he is responsible for it 100%.”

Don’t be distracted by such straw man arguments as the Sandra Fluke birth control smokescreen, gay marriage, Paul Ryan’s budget or any other argument of Team Obama that seeks to make people forget that the Left firmly owns both the Occupy protests and the anemic Economy.  If we can keep this message in front of voters in 2012 then we will prevail in winning the White House, the Senate and increasing Republican majority in the House of Representatives.

Stay focused!

Posted in economics, politics | Leave a comment

Can Only Whites Be Conservative?

Posted on 18-May-2012 by Highvoltage

There was a recent report released by the Census Bureau stating that for the first time in US history Non-White births exceed White births.

“Non-Hispanic whites accounted for 49.6 percent of all births in the 12-month period that ended in July 2011. Minorities — including Hispanics, blacks, Asians and those of mixed race — reached 50.4 percent, representing a majority for the first time in the country’s history.”

This particular fact doesn’t bother me because I still believe that the American spirit isn’t determined by the color of its citizens’ skin but by the culture that is fostered by our Republic.  We are still a true melting pot where we take the best that diversity has to offer and blend that with our Freedom and adherence to the Constitution to make the best country in the world.  

But I noticed that one particular Leftist, @TimJacobWise, seems to think that the Conservative political group will soon be dead without a majority of Whites to fill its rolls.  This was evident by his tweet below:

I responded back by stating that I found it ironic that a man who had written 7 books on racism (A fact I got from his Twitter profile) would think that only Whites can be Conservatives.  Here was my tweet and his response:


So what Mr. Wise is saying is that people of color who support Conservatism today are like people of color who supported slavery.  That is quite a reach and I know several people of color who are Conservative who I would not classify as such.  Conservative principles with regard to fiscal, economic and foreign policy don’t have racist foundations and don’t require its proponents to be White and to say that they do is truly stupid.  Here was my response to him and I never received a reply.

Scrolling through his timeline I discovered another interesting tweet:

According to Mr. Wise, if you read more books by Conservative authors than those written by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. then you are an idiot (“by definition”).  I didn’t know that comparing the quantity of Conservative books read vs. those written by Dr. King was part of the definition of the word “idiot” but a guy who has written 7 books on racism has to know, right?  I am a huge fan of Dr. King and think he was a true patriot and I cast no aspersions on him but I think Mr. Wise’s definition of idiot is a bit of hyperbole.

Here is a link showing all the books written by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the total is 8 so you are only allowed to read 8 books written by Conservatives or you are “by definition” considered an idiot.  It’s a good thing Mr. Wise isn’t a Conservative or we couldn’t read all of his books on racism since he’s only written 7.

Posted in politics | 2 Comments

People Aren’t Normal

Posted on 17-May-2012 by Highvoltage

There was a fascinating journal article published in Personnel Psychology (“The Best and the Rest: Revisiting the Norm of Normality of Individual Performance”) that showed personal performance across many industries didn’t fit a normal distribution (bell curve) but instead fit a Paretian curve (power law).  The Paretian curve is similar to the 80/20 rule which states that 80% of the work is done by 20% of the population and this revelation flies in the face of traditional corporate thought with regard to evaluating employee performance.

Before we get into the meat of the journal article, let’s go over some high level statistical information.

Anyone who is in statistics, engineering or manufacturing is familiar with a Normal Curve (also called the Bell Curve).  This distribution graph (shown below) has the probability of a certain variable being encountered represented on the y-axis and the continuous range of variable possibilities represented on the x-axis.  The  Normal Curve predicts that over 68% of the population will be within +/- 1 standard deviation of the mean and only 0.2% of the population will reside at the tails (outside of +/- 3 standard deviations).

The following picture shows the difference between the Normal Distribution and the Paretian curve.

You’ll notice that the right tail of the Paretian curve (areas of exceptional performance) is thicker which means a larger percentage of the population performs at the exceptional level than what would be predicted by a Normal Curve.  The Paretian curve also shows that a larger percentage of the population performs below the mean than what is predicted from the Normal Curve. 

When talking about variables related to “things” (manufacturing process variables such as temperature, pressure, flow rate, etc. or characteristics such as height, weight, distances, etc.) then the Normal Curve is a good approximation of the population but this journal article concludes that the Normal Curve does not approximate the performance of individuals.

Now let’s get to the results of the journal article.  Here is a quote from the journal article introduction:

“We revisit a long-held assumption in human resource management, organizational behavior, and industrial and organizational psychology that individual performance follows a Gaussian (normal) distribution. We conducted 5 studies involving 198 samples including 633,263 researchers, entertainers, politicians, and amateur and professional athletes. Results are remarkably consistent across industries, types of jobs, types of performance measures, and time frames and indicate that individual performance is not normally distributed—instead, it follows a Paretian (power law) distribution. Assuming normality of individual performance can lead to misspecified theories and misleading practices. Thus, our results have implications for all theories and applications that directly or indirectly address the performance of individual workers including performance measurement and management, utility analysis in preemployment testing and training and development, personnel selection, leadership, and the prediction of performance, among others.”

Anyone who works in a company that has more than a dozen employees has to go through an annual performance review period and they know that the ratings for their team are forced to fit into a normal distribution – very few low/high performers and the vast majority of the population must fit into the “average” label.  It’s a frustrating process and this journal article sheds light on why it is so difficult –Personal performance doesn’t fit the Normal Distribution. 

This article covered 5 studies – The number of published articles for researchers, the number of Emmy nominations for actors/actresses, the number of times someone was re-elected to the state and national office, positive college/professional sports statistic and negative college/professional sports statistics.  Here is a summary of the conclusions from the article (emphasis mine):

“We conducted five separate studies to determine whether the distribution of individual performance more closely follows a Paretian curve than a Gaussian curve. In all studies, the primary hypothesis was that the distribution of performance is better modeled with a Paretian curve than a normal curve. For each of the five studies, we used the chi-square (χ2) statistic to determine whether individual performance more closely follows a Paretian versus a Gaussian distribution. The chi-square is a “badness of fit” statistic because higher values indicate worse fit (Aguinis & Harden, 2009). That is, the greater the degree of divergence of an empirically derived performance distribution from a Gaussian or Paretian distribution, the higher the chi-square. Accordingly, for each of the samples we studied we first forced the data to conform to a normal distribution and then forced the same data to conform to a Paretian distribution. For each comparison, a smaller chi-square value indicates which of the two theoretical distributions describes the data better.”

In all areas that this study investigated, the distribution of personnel performance followed a Paretian distribution instead of a Normal distribution.  Here are a few of the distributions that are presented in the paper that prove this conclusion.

So what does this tell us? 

Managers have been trying to fit their employees into a Normal Curve for decades and the reason this has been a struggle is because this is not reality! 

There are a vast number of employees who perform below “average” when measured against the Normal Curve but “below average” on the Paretian curve doesn’t carry the same stigma as “below average” on the Normal curve.  If a company chose to terminate all those who perform below average on a Paretian curve then a majority of its employees would be sent packing.   Companies need a new grading scale that recognizes that a large, but important, percentage of employees actually performs “below average” but not so low to warrant disciplinary action.  

There are also a significant proportion of employees who perform “above average” and this number is vastly greater than is predicted by the Normal Curve.  Companies need a new grading scale that accounts for better differentiation of employees that perform above expectations since the right hand tail of the Paretian curve is thicker than the Normal Curve predicts.  Companies need to spend more time differentiating their top performers, rewarding them accordingly and incentivizing those “below average” to improve their performance.

This study should prompt companies to radically reform their performance metrics.

Posted in general science, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Liberal Inconsistencies

Posted on 15-May-2012 by Highvoltage

J.P. Morgan recently announced that they made risky plays in the derivatives market and got taken to the cleaners to the tune of a $2 billion loss.

“The biggest U.S. bank by assets said on Thursday that it had lost $2 billion on bad bets on credit derivatives, made by a London trading desk, run by a man other traders have alternately dubbed “The London Whale” and “Voldemort.” The office is intended to hedge the giant bank’s credit risk, not increase it.”

Well, that’s business – If you decide to gamble with your capital and make risky bets then you can expect losses like this.  It happens in businesses every day and it’s called the Free Market and it’s what drives entrepreneurs and other business drivers to invest in risky ventures like cell phones, computers, tablets and hybrid automobiles.  The Market rewards those businesses that perform their due diligence before entering into risky investments and punishes those who make cavalier and frequent ventures into risky gambles.

I’m not feeling too bad for JP Morgan since they recently announced they made a net income profit of $5.383 billion for the first quarter of 2012 so it appears they can absorb this loss. 

Given the Left’s hatred toward “obscene” bank profits, you’d think they’d be cheering this publicly humiliating loss of J.P. Morgan.  But no, logic isn’t usually a part of Leftist arguments and President Obama and his team showed that today. 

“President Barack Obama discussed JPMorgan Chase’s $2 billion loss on Monday, saying the bank’s massive failure proves why Wall Street reform is necessary. “

“JPMorgan is one of the best-managed banks there is,” Obama said during an interview on ABC’s “The View”, which will air on Tuesday. “Jamie Dimon, the head of it, is one of the smartest bankers we got, and they still lost $2 billion and counting.”

“We don’t know all the details,” Obama said. “It’s going to be investigated, but this is why we passed Wall Street reform.”

“According to the president, if even a bank as well-managed as JPMorgan could make an error this glaring, other banks are susceptible to similar blunders. “

“You could have a bank that isn’t as strong, isn’t as profitable, managing those same bets and we might have had to step in,” Obama said. “That’s why Wall Street reform is so important.”

“Obama’s comments echoed those made by White House press secretary Jay Carney earlier on Monday. Speaking to reporters on Air Force One, Carney said JPMorgan Chase’s loss proved that the reforms put in place after 2008’s financial crisis were necessary.”

Wait a minute!  J.P. Morgan’s $2 billion debacle isn’t going to cost the tax payers any money and as I’ve shown above, the bank isn’t going into bankruptcy any time soon.  Why the grandstanding and calls for more regulation when a private business just got publically humiliated for making risky bets that failed?  Liberals don’t like it when Banks make huge profits and now they don’t like it when their profits are reduced from risky bets?  What exactly do Leftists want from the banking industry?   

The Foundry already pointed out that even under an increased regulatory environment from the Volcker Rule, J.P. Morgan could still legally have made this risky gamble.  

“Commentators will be tempted to say this could not have happened if regulations intended to guard against risky trading, such as the Volcker Rule, were in place. Not true. The trading strategy JPMorgan Chase used is legal, and it would still be legal under the Volcker Rule. In a free-market system, banks as well as businesses are free to take risks, which result in either successes or failures, profits or losses. The Securities and Exchange Commission has already begun an investigation of the bank’s financial disclosures, but the bottom line is that mistakes like this do and must happen, in banking as well as other industries where risk is part of the business.”

To sum up – We have a private business taking it on the chin because they chose to play in a risky environment and the Leftists want increased government regulation to prevent this from happening in the future.  This issue gets to the heart of the Liberal Worldview that believes the government can do a better job of running a business or picking winners and losers than the Free Market.  Really?  Based on what evidence?  Solyndra?

If we want to truly address the inconvenient truth that banks and other US corporations are literally “too big to fail” then we have to let those companies (and their investors) suffer the consequences of making risky bets that don’t pay off.  Increased government regulation is not the answer but letting the Free Market work along with individual and corporate accountability is the only answer that history has proven to work. 

Posted in economics, Over Regulation, politics | 2 Comments

The Super Moon and a Super Coincidence

Posted on 13-May-2012 by Highvoltage

The world was excited last week about the Super Moon in the sky but before we move on to the next celestial excitement, let’s ponder a beautiful coincidence regarding the apparent sizes of the Moon with respect to the Sun and the orbital distances of the Moon/Earth and Earth/Sun systems. 

The full moon last week was called ‘Super’ because it occurred when the moon was at its perigee point of its orbit around Earth.  As Kepler’s 1st law taught us, all celestial bodies orbit in ellipses (not perfect circles) with the larger body residing at one of 2 foci of the elliptical orbit.   The two end points of the orbit are called the perigee (for the point closest to the foci where the larger body resides) and the other point is apogee (for the point farthest to the foci where the larger body resides).  The Moon orbits the Earth in this same manner and when the moon is at perigee and when the Earth is between a line occupied by the Moon and Sun (Full Moon) we call this the Super Moon. 

The size of the moon during this past Super Moon was only about 14% larger than normal Full Moons but it was enough for us to notice it with our naked eyes.  There is a nice photo album of this past week’s Super Moon here but I’d like to turn your attention to the photo from the Astronomy Photo of the Day posted on 11-MAY-12 (note that the picture was taken on the day of perigee, 06-MAY-12). 

You’ll notice that indeed the moon was slightly larger than the Sun on that day and 14 days later, on the 20th, there will be an annular eclipse of the Sun that parts of the Earth will be able to view.  The annular eclipse happens when the moon is at apogee so the size of the moon (as viewed from Earth) is slightly too small to cover the entire width of the sun and there is a small sliver of an outline of the sun during this type of eclipse.  When the moon is at other parts of its orbit the eclipse is total which means the entire Sun is covered.

So depending on where the moon is in its orbit around Earth, the eclipse is either total or annular but for the most part, many of Earth’s inhabitants get to enjoy a solar eclipse every year (depending on where you live). 

As a child, there was a total eclipse in my area of the United States and I had gone to the trouble of making a cardboard box with a hole and a viewing panel so that I could experience this rare event and I was ready to view it (knowing, even as a child, that you should NEVER look directly at an eclipse).  My labors were in vain though because when the event happened, I noticed that Mother Nature had provided a much better viewing platform.  There was a large Maple tree in my backyard that had a disease which produced tiny pin holes to develop in all its leaves and when I walked under that tree I was blessed to see thousands of eclipse projections on the ground!  I still remember that day like it was yesterday and it was one of those special moments that can’t be planned and most likely will never be duplicated.

Now let me get to the real point of this post.  Think about this – nominally, the size of the moon, the size of the sun, the orbital distance of the moon around the Earth and the orbital distance of the Earth around the Sun are just the right dimensions to provide us with an eclipse of the Sun periodically.  If any of these four variables would have been different (size of the moon/Sun or orbital dimensions of the moon/Earth or Earth/Sun systems) then we would not have the pleasure of witnessing this wonderful event. 

Exit Question – Is this just dumb luck or a nice perk provided to us from an Intelligent Designer?

Posted in astronomy | 1 Comment

Who Controls the US Government?

Posted on 10-May-2012 by Highvoltage

It seems Obama is hitching his re-election wagon to the Class Warfare/Income Inequality meme and at least weekly we see speeches like this one where he says the only way to get out of this financial mess is to tax the wealthy that need to pay their fair share.  The implication being that the wealthy have some sweetheart deal with Washington DC and use politicians to do their bidding and increase the wealth.

But is that true?  Sure there are examples of fat cats using crony capitalism to benefit their business and personal wealth but, on average, does our Federal government pass more laws that hand out money to the Wealthy versus laws that provide assistance to the poor and middle class?

Let’s take a look at how the US government spends their money and what share of the tax revenue that the wealthy pay to see if that is true.  If the wealthy controlled government then entitlement programs would see their funding cut and the percent of tax revenue paid by the wealthy decreased (shifting the tax burden to the poor).

That’s what Obama seems to be saying here:

“Let me ask you, what’s the better way to make our economy stronger?” Obama told an enthusiastic crowd in Boca Raton, Fla. “Do we give … tax breaks to every millionaire and billionaire in the country? Or should we make investments in education and research and health care and our veterans?”

To see if this theory is true we need to graph various spending that the poor or middle class benefit from (Welfare, Social Security, Education and Healthcare) and compare that to the percent of tax revenue that the wealthy (which I define as those making over $100,000 per year) contribute.

For the spending data, I’ll use constant 2005 dollars to normalize for inflation and use the metric “spending per capita” to normalize to population increases.  This data can be obtained from the following links:

Welfare – here

Social Security – here

Education – here

Healthcare – here

The IRS data showing what percent of total tax revenue that each income demographic contributes is obtained from this link and only goes back to 1996 and runs through 2009 so that is the time period I’ll use for our comparison. 

Here are the graphs for Welfare, Social Security, Education and Healthcare spending compared to the share of tax revenue that the wealthy contribute.

From these graphs we see that spending for programs benefiting poor or middle class citizens have increased and the percent of tax revenue contributed by the wealthy has increased at similar rates.  You can say that the tax burden on the wealthy has increased to pay for the government assistance for the poor and middle class.  This is hardly evidence that the wealthy control government because we’d expect the exact opposite to occur! 

And if you think this increased spending on Welfare, Social Security and Education is a recent phenomenon, here are the spending graphs since 1970.

Entitlement spending has been on this unsustainable trend for decades and this is why we have a spending problem and not a revenue problem in the United States.  I’ve shown previously that the rich pay more than their faire share so this “Fairness” argument of the Left doesn’t hold up when the data are analyzed.  The Heritage Blog has also shown that the top 10% of earners account for 71% of all tax revenue so you can’t say they aren’t paying their fair share.

The US Federal government is not controlled by the wealthy and from the data it can be deduced that the poor and middle class actually control spending because they get more of the money while contributing little to nothing in taxes. 

Posted in economics, Entitlement Programs, politics | 1 Comment